westminster women: the politics of presence women.pdf · westminster women: the politics of...

WESTMINSTER WOMEN ~ LOVENDUSKI AND NORRIS - POLITICAL STUDIES 2/16/2004

1

Westminster Women: The Politics of Presence

Joni Lovenduski and Pippa Norris

Joni Lovenduski Pippa NorrisSchool of Politics and Sociology John F. Kennedy School of GovernmentBirkbeck College Harvard UniversityUniversity of London, Bloomsbury, Cambridge, London WC1E 7HX MA [email protected] [email protected]://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc www.pippanorris.com

Synopsis: The entry of the 1997 cohort of Labour women into public life offers a test case of

whether, and under what conditions, women politicians have the capacity to ‘make a substantive

difference’. Part I outlines the theory of the politics of presence and discusses how to

operationalize this in a testable model. Part II describes the data and measures, using the British

Representation Study survey of 1000 national politicians (including parliamentary candidates and

elected Members of Parliament) conducted in the 2001 general election. Part III examines the

evidence for the impact of gender on five scales measuring attitudes and values on issues that

commonly divide British party politics.

The study suggests that once we control for party, there are no significant differences

among women and men politicians across the value scales concerning the free market economy,

Europe, and moral traditionalism. Yet on the values most directly related to women’s interests –

namely the affirmative action and the gender equality scales – women and men politicians differ

significantly within each party, even after controlling for other common social background

variables that explain attitudes, such as their age, education, and income. The conclusion

summarises the main findings and considers why this could matter for the composition of

parliament, the public policy agenda and for women’s roles as political leaders.

***

For Political Studies

Total: 8901 words

Draft at: 16/02/2004 18:28

Joni Lovenduski is Professor of Politics at Birkbeck College, London.

Pippa Norris is the McGuire Lecturer in Comparative Politics at Harvard University.


2

The rising tide of women in elected office has raised expectations about their role as

political leaders. Some hope, and others fear, that this development could alter the predominant

political culture, the policy agenda, and the representation of women’s interests in public life. This

growth has occurred in many democracies and it is exemplified by dramatic developments at

Westminster where the June 1997 election saw the entry of 120 women members into the UK

House of Commons (18%), double the number elected in 1992. This trend forms part of a larger

phenomenon evident in the United Kingdom during the late-1990s where growing numbers of

women entered other legislative bodies, thereby becoming 37% of the Scottish Parliament and

40% of the Welsh Assembly, 24% of British MEPs in the European parliament, 16% of the House

of Lords, and 27% of local councilors (see Figure 1). The change experienced in Britain

represents part of a larger shift in cultural attitudes towards the political and social roles of women

that has been sweeping through many postindustrial societies (Norris and Inglehart 2003).

[Figure 1 about here]

What are the political consequences that flow from this development? And, in particular,

did the entry of a substantial number of women MPs in the 1997 election, and their subsequent

re-election in 2001, alter the predominant culture at Westminster? This article compares survey

evidence drawn from a representative sample of almost one thousand national politicians in

Britain (including parliamentary candidates and elected members) to examine whether women

leaders display distinctive attitudes and values which have the capacity to make a substantive

difference for women’s interests. Part I briefly explains the theoretical framework based on the

politics of presence and outlines a model to test it empirically. Three sources of evidence are

available to examine the theoretical claims. We argue that, given the serious constraints on

backbench activities at Westminster, behavioral measures, such as roll-call data based on

legislative voting rebellions, provide an unduly limited yardstick for examining the capacity of

women politicians to offer a distinctive contribution to politics. Self-reported measures taken at

face value without independent verification, such as interviews where women politicians claim to

act for women, are equally suspect given the electoral self-interest embodied in such claims. In

contrast cultural measures provide the most suitable, systematic and reliable evidence, where

any gender differences in attitudes and values can be regarded as a necessary, although not

sufficient, condition for women representatives to act for women as a group. If women and men

MPs share similar attitudes and values, then it seems unlikely that the election of more women

backbenchers has the potential to make any sort of substantive policy difference, whether

through legislative votes, parliamentary activities, or influencing the policy process behind the

scenes. We theorize that the values of women and men politicians can be expected to prove

similar on many traditional left-right issues that have long divided British party politics, but that


3

they can be expected to display the most significant contrasts towards the key issues that most

directly affect women’s ability to lead an independent life. Part II describes the data and

measures, including the British Representation Study survey of 1000 candidates and members

conducted in the 2001 general election. Part III examines the evidence for gender differences

concerning five scales measuring attitudes and values that commonly divide British party politics.

The results confirm that once we control for party, there are no significant differences among

women and men leaders across the value scales measuring support for the Free Market

economy, for European Integration, and for Traditional Moral values. Yet on the values and

attitudes that are most closely related to women’s autonomy – namely the Affirmative Action and

the Gender Equality scales – women and men express significantly different values within each

party. This pattern persists even after controlling for other social variables that commonly

influence attitudes, such as age, education and income. The conclusion summarizes the main

findings and considers why and under what conditions they may have important consequences.

I: Theoretical Framework

The flourishing and extensive literature on women and public office has developed two

central strands. The first focuses on ‘descriptive representation’, seeking to identify the reasons

why so few women are elected to legislative bodies and the importance of barriers such as the

electoral system, the role of party recruitment processes, and the resources and motivation that

women bring to the pursuit of elected office (c.f. Darcy, Welch and Clark 1994; Lovenduski and

Norris 1993, 1996; Norris and Lovenduski 1995). Descriptive representation can be regarded as

intrinsically valuable, for example Mansbridge (1999) argues that for African-Americans and for

women, both historically disadvantaged social groups, the entry of representatives into public

office improves the quality of group deliberations, increases a sense of democratic legitimacy,

and develops leadership capacity. The second approach pursues the related question of whether,

if elected, women will ‘make a difference’ in legislative life and political leadership, or if they will

offer ‘substantive’ representation of women (Diamond 1977; Thomas 1994; Norris 1996;

Tremblay 1998; MacDougal 1998; Carroll 2001; Swers 2001). Feminist theorists suggest that the

presence of women in the House of Commons offers possibilities that women are not just

‘standing as’ women but also ‘acting for’ women as a group (Phillips 1995; Lovenduski 1997).

This argument is commonly heard when it is assumed that, due to their particular life-experiences

in the home, workplace and public sphere, women politicians prioritize and express different

types of values, attitudes, and policy priorities, such as greater concern about childcare, health or

education, or a less conflictual and more collaborative political style (see for example Brooks,

Eagle and Short 1990; Perrigo 1996; Phillips 1995, 1998; Short 1996; MacDougal 1998).

Although these issues are of long-standing theoretical interest, in Britain until recently there have

been so few women serving in most levels of public office that it seemed premature to ask what

impact they may have on the policy process. The changing situation during the 1990s, however,


4

calls for these issues to be reexamined.

How might such a distinctive contribution be identified and tested? The theoretical framework in

this study draws on accounts of ‘the politics of presence’ developed by Anne Phillips (1995,

1998). Acknowledging that mechanisms of accountability (the politics of ideas) are necessary to

representative democracy, Phillips argues that women have a distinctive group identity based

upon shared common interests on issues such as abortion, childcare or equal opportunities in

education and the labour force. There is nothing particularly novel about these type of claims,

after all the analogy can be drawn with many other groups which have sought to secure

legislative representation within established or separate parties to articulate and defend their

interests. Such a process is exemplified in the early twentieth century by the creation of the

British Labour Party by trade unions to advance collective labour organizations and the legal right

to strike (Pelling 1968). Acknowledging that men and women have complex sets of interests that

both diverge and overlap, and that women as a group are far from monolithic, Phillips points out

that '…the variety of women's interests does not refute the claim that interests are gendered.

…The argument from interest does not depend on establishing a unified interest of all women: it

depends, rather, on establishing a difference between the interests of women and men. ' (Phillips

1995,68). If, however, women are divided by predominant crosscutting cleavages, such as those

of social class, region, ethnicity or religion, and by ideological divisions between left and right,

then these factors may over-ride any common or shared interests associated with gender. The

classic account of the evolution and consolidation of parties in Western Europe, by Lipset and

Rokkan (1967), argued that other cleavages in the electorate were the primary building blocks of

party competition – including those dividing the core and periphery regions, Catholics and

Protestants, and workers and the bourgeoisie. Lipset and Rokkan assumed that any residual

differences between women and men were subsumed under these primary social cleavages.

Before we can test the claims of the politics of presence thesis it is necessary to establish a clear

definition of ‘women's interests’. Although this concept is common, it remains controversial in

feminist scholarship. As Wängnerud notes, problems include the relationship between ‘objective’

and ‘subjective’ interests, as well as the relationship between gender and other social divisions

like race and class (Wängnerud 2000, 68). Defined broadly, if ‘women’s interests’ are understood

to include all political issues where women and men may disagree, for example in their attitudes

towards the deployment of armed forces, the protection of the environment, or the desirability of a

strong and effective welfare safety net, then it becomes unclear how to define the boundaries of

‘women’s interests’. Instead it seems preferable to adopt a strong but narrower definition of

women's interests since such a formulation will improve its possibilities for effective theorizing

and measurement. In line with Wängnerud (2000:70), we understand women's shared interest to

concern issues which increase their autonomy. Such politicization is a process that can be

treated as a number of steps in which (1) women are recognized as a social category, that is the


5

gender neutrality of politics is contested; (2) the inequalities of power between the sexes are

acknowledged; and, (3) policies to increase the autonomy of women are made. In her analysis of

interview data on successive cohorts of Swedish legislators, Wängnerud shows how each step

influences the political process and concludes that women's presence in the Riksdag has brought

about a shift of emphasis whereby women's interests have become more central in politics. She

finds differences in attitudes between women and men across a wide range of issues and shows

how these differences provoke political changes that lead to an increased legislative sensitivity to

women's interests by all politicians. She found that the articulation and mobilization of such

interests in the Riksdag is the work of women politicians (Wängnerud 2000).

Yet we recognize that the effects of women’s presence in politics do not happen

automatically but exist and become explicit under certain conditions. Instructive here is the work

of Rosabeth Moss Kanter (1977) on gender relations within industrial corporations. Kanter's

argument is that the size of a minority matters. Uniform groups contain only men or only women.

Skewed groups contain a large imbalance of men or women, up to about 15 percent of the

minority group. Tilted groups contain about 15-40 percent of the opposite sex. Lastly, balanced

groups contain 40-50 percent of each sex. Kanter's suggests that once a group reaches a certain

size – somewhere in the tilted group range --the minority starts to assert itself and from this

assertion there eventually follows a transformation of the institutional culture. This argument

implies that rather than steady evolution, there is a critical ‘tipping point’ that depends upon

numbers. When a group remains a small minority within a larger society its members are tokens

who will seek to adapt to their surroundings, conforming to the predominant rules of the game.

They will not act to increase the size of their group. If anything their various available strategies

(‘queen bee’, assimilation, and so on) will tend to keep the number of tokens appropriately and

conveniently small. Once the group reaches a certain size, their available strategies change and

lead to a qualitative shift in the nature of group interactions, as the minority starts to assert itself

and thereby transform the institutional culture, norms and values. But it takes more than mere

numbers, as process is also important. In a critical assessment of this argument, Janice Yoder

drew attention to the processes that take place as numbers change. Where women are in

gender-inappropriate occupations, as defined by traditional norms, then an increase in their

numbers may generate a backlash. When this occurs, it makes it difficult for women to influence

the wider society or organization, at least initially (Yoder 1991, see also Dahlerup 1988). Taken

together, this body of work suggests that to understand what happens when the numbers of

women rises, it is necessary to understand under what conditions change can be expected to

occur and how institutional effects will distort or delay this process.


6

II: Measures, Data and Methods

Therefore 'presence' theory highlights gendered interests as the cause of the political change that

occurs when women enter a legislature. If women and men politicians differ in their underlying

interests, then when parliaments include more women politicians this could contribute towards a

transformation in the institutional culture, political discourse, and policy agenda. The expectations

are explicit in Clare Short’s claims: “As more women come into the Commons, the culture will

change, the agenda of politics will broaden, and the institution itself will be transformed.” (Quoted

in McDougal 1998). The entry of more women politicians into the House of Commons following

the 1997 election generated high expectations of what they could achieve. Are such

expectations likely to be met? The 'presence’ argument suggest that, beyond a certain

threshold, as the numbers of women change, so also will other elements of the legislature

because men and women bring different interests to politics. Yet the precise consequences are

left implicit, albeit with some agreement about what they might be.

There are at least three alternative ways in which any latent gender ‘difference’ among

politicians could be expressed and measured, namely through (i) the legislative voting record of

MPs; (ii) the roles and activities of backbenchers; and (iii) the underlying cultural attitudes and

ideological values of politicians.

MPs Legislative Voting Record

The first and strongest measure of political impact could be if women and men MPs

differed in their voting record on key bills, for example if women were more likely to rebel against

Labour initiatives to cut back on welfare or childcare benefits. This approach has often been used

in the United States, where gender differences have been established in studies examining roll

call data in Congress and state houses (Vega and Firestone 1995; Dolan 1997; Swers 1998).

This yardstick was also commonly used to evaluate the 1997 cohort of women MPs by the British

press. As a result, within a few months of their entry in 1997, popular commentary in the media

often adopted a critical and skeptical tone, suggesting that initial hopes for women as agents of

change failed to be realized (Perkins 1999). Far from altering parliament, ‘Blair’s Babes’, as they

were quickly dubbed by the tabloids, appeared more quiescent towards the leadership, less

willing to rebel, and therefore unlikely to make a distinctive contribution to the legislative agenda

(Cowley and Childs 2001; Thomson 1999). Criticism was particularly strong in the 1997

Parliament when Labour cuts in benefits for lone mothers were more likely to be supported by

women than men MPs. Research by Phillip Cowley and Sarah Childs confirmed that Labour

women MPs were slightly less likely to rebel than men although these gender differences

diminished to near insignificance after controls for cohort of entry were introduced (Cowley and

Childs forthcoming). Press criticism of the newly elected Labour women was sustained and

frequently vicious. It was also reflected in comments by MPs on both sides of the house. Thus


7

Brian Sedgemore, Labour member for Hackney South and Shoreditch, famously referred to the

new Labour women MPs as 'Steptford Wives' (The Observer 1 April 2001) while the leader of the

Conservatives, Iain Duncan Smith, accused them of being second rate politicians (Financial

Times 4 August 2001). The stigma of 'Blairs Babes' continued throughout the life of the

parliament elected in 1997.

Despite the well-established use of roll call analysis in the US Congress, however, in

European parliamentary democracies legislative votes seem an unduly limited and too strict test

of political effectiveness, given party constraints on backbench MPs common in these nations

(Bowler, Farrell and Katz 1999). The ability of elected members to rebel on most legislative votes

at Westminster remains highly constrained, due to the sanctions of strict discipline by party whips,

especially during an era of strong parliamentary management by the governing party. ‘Free’

votes, such as moral issues on which party managers give no instructions to their backbenchers,

provide an exception, but these issues remain atypical of Westminster politics, and high levels of

party discipline and cohesion persist even when the party whips are ‘off’ (Cowley 1997). British

MPs who commonly rebel on whipped votes can face severe penalties in terms of lack of

ministerial advancement, or even loss of further nomination, effectively ending their political

careers (Norton 1993). As a result, in European democracies the political expression of any

potential differences among women and men members of parliament could be suppressed by the

institutional context.

MPs Political Roles and Activities

The second, weaker claim is that the parliamentary activities of backbench women MPs

could still differ in many other regards beyond legislative votes, such as in the priority that they

give towards constituency service (Norris and Lovenduski 1995), or in their style of politics in

committee work, parliamentary debates, Private Members Bills, or Early Day Motions. American

research, for example, has often found that women in Congress and state houses promote

women's issues through lobbying, committee work and bill sponsorship (Tamerius 1995) as well

as finding that women and men differ in their rhetorical style during committee hearing debates

(Kathlene 1994; Rosenthal 1997). The literature in the United States suggests that women

officeholders give greater attention than their male colleagues of the same party to women’s

rights, as well as to concerns reflecting women’s traditional roles as caregivers in the family and

society (Carroll 2001). Similar patterns have been established in the Nordic states, where women

leaders have raised distinctive concerns, such as through parliamentary questions and debates

(Karvonnen and Per Selle 1995, Skjeie 1993, Bergqvist 2000), as well as affecting the agenda-

setting process on issues like day-care coverage (Bratton and Ray 2002). Georgia Duerst-Lahti

and Rita Mae Kelly (1995) provide evidence of different leadership styles and practices by male

and female legislators in the USA. In the Australian parliament women representatives have


8

also been found to bring a distinctive contribution to parliamentary debates on issues such as

euthanasia (Broughton and Palmieri 1999). Yet while some studies suggest that women do make

a distinct contribution to the policy agenda in legislatures elsewhere, such as in North America,

Western Europe and Scandinavia, the evidence remains under debate (see for example,

discussions in Thomas 1994; Karvonnen and Selle 1996; Tremblay 1998; Carroll 2001; Reingold

2000).

In Britain, anecdotal reports suggest that women MPs work effectively on behalf of

women behind the scenes, for example in influencing party policies or articulating women’s

concerns in discussion with ministers (Lovenduski 2001). In discussions women MPs also

commonly make similar claims (Ross 2002). For example, interviews with half the newly elected

Labour women MPs in 1997 found that two-thirds identified as feminists, expressing support for

the values of women’s autonomy and equality, suggesting that there might be the potential for the

articulation of a distinctive voice in parliament (Childs 2001a, 2001b). Yet without independent

verification it remains difficult to evaluate the validity of these self-reported claims, which cannot

simply be accepted at face value, given that members have a vested interest in making such

arguments when seeking to maximize their electoral support. Nevertheless given these

considerations, the analysis of MPs’ voting records, the main yardstick used by critics of the

conformity of ‘Blair’s babes’, may well prove too narrow to monitor the full range of legislative

activities and backbench roles where men and women may differ at Westminster.

Political Attitudes and Values

Lastly, even if all these conditions fail - that is to say even if we assume that there are no

behavioral differences because the parliamentary votes of women MPs conform to the bidding of

party whips, and if women and men backbenchers adopt similar legislative roles and activities in

the House of Commons - nevertheless the third claim is that the underlying attitudes and values

of women and men politicians could still differ in some important regards. After all an extensive

body of literature has established that women legislators in America commonly express slightly

more liberal attitudes across a range of social and economic issues, after controlling for their type

of party and district (Thomas 1994; Duerst-Lahti and Kelly 1995; Thomas and Wilcox 1998;

Carroll 2001). Could such findings be replicated at Westminster? In the UK parliament the

existence of strong party discipline and the predominant parliamentary culture might make it

difficult for women backbenchers to articulate a distinctive set of perspectives and interests, as a

minority, although they may differ substantially from men members on many core attitudes and

values, especially on issues concerning women’s interests. Yet on the other hand, if women and

men MPs share similar attitudes and values, due to either the selection process in parties or to

the socialization process at Westminster, then it seems unlikely that women backbenchers will be

motivated to make a substantive policy difference, whether through legislative votes,


9

parliamentary activities, or influencing the policy process behind the scenes. Attitudinal

differences can therefore be regarded as a necessary although not sufficient condition for women

representatives to act for women as a group.

The British Representation Survey, 2001

To measure attitudinal differences, this study analyzes a representative sample of

national politicians (including British parliamentary candidates and elected Members of

Parliament). Evidence is drawn from the 2001 British Representation Studies (BRS), a mail

survey sent to all parliamentary candidates and MPs standing in the British general election for all

parties with parliamentary representation.

In early spring 2001, before the official campaign got underway, the BRS was mailed to

1,859 candidates selected by the main British parties (excluding the Greens, BNP, UK

Independence party, and other minor parties or independent candidates without parliamentary

representation). In total 1085 politicians had replied by the end of June 2001, representing a

response rate of 58.4 percent (for full details and the questionnaires see www.pippanorris.com).

Although the response rate was (as usual) higher among parliamentary candidates than MPs, the

study includes about one third of the current House of Commons, and it is broadly representative

by party. The results can be compared with other surveys in this series, the 1997 British

Representation Study (BRS-97) (N. 999), and the 1992 British Candidate Study (N.1658) (for full

methodological details of previous research see Norris and Lovenduski 1995). Initial analysis of

the results in terms of patterns of party ideology is available elsewhere (Norris and Lovenduski

2001).

This study focuses on whether women and men politicians differ within each party in terms of a

wide range of political attitudes and values. We monitored attitudes towards major economic,

social and foreign policy issues commonly dividing British party politics, exemplified by attitudes

towards Britain’s membership of the European Union, support for values such as the

redistribution of wealth, and support for traditional moral values, as well as towards explicitly

gendered issues such as the use of affirmative action for women candidates and equal

opportunities policy. The BRS contains multiple items measuring these values, with most derived

from long-standing questions contained in the British Election Study. Principal component factor

analysis with varimax rotation was used to examine the underlying ideological dimensions in

responses to 26 items. The results in Table 1 show that the items fell into five dimensions that

divided British politicians, reflecting attitudes towards the classic left-right dimension of support for

the free market economy, affirmative action towards women, liberal gender equality, Europe, and

moral traditionalism. The factor analysis accounted for over half (58.8%) of the variance in

attitudes towards these items. As shown in Table 1, each of the five scales proved consistent and

reliable when tested using Cronbach’s Alpha (all scoring .80 or above). The scales were


10

standardized to 100-points for ease of interpretation, where low equals minimal support and high

represents maximum support. We first compared the mean score on each scale by gender and

party, testing the significance of any difference in the group means by ANOVA. We then

employed OLS regression analysis to see whether the gender differences that we established on

some scales persisted after controlling for other factors that commonly predict political attitudes,

including age, income and education, as well as party and incumbency status.

[Table 1 about here]

III: Results and Analysis

Differences in the mean scores on these scales among women and men within each

party are shown in Table 2. The results show that once we control for party, there are almost no

significant differences in the values of women and men leaders concerning the core scales

measuring support for free market left-right economic values, attitudes towards Britain’s role in

the European Union, and moral traditionalism. On all these values women and men politicians

displayed common agreement within each party, The only exception concerns the economic

values of Labour women that were significantly more moderate or centrist than their male

colleagues. In all these regards, contrary to some of the evidence in studies of gender differences

in the American Congress and state houses (Vega and Firestone 1995; Dolan 1997; Swers

1998), there is no support for the stronger claims that women leaders in British politics are

consistently more liberal or more conservative than men towards the traditional left-right issues

such as crime, moral censorship, or the redistribution of income that have long divided party

politics at Westminster. Nor are women politicians in each party significantly more or less

‘internationalist’ in orientation towards the EU than men, another set of issues that generates

sharp inter- and intra-party clashes. On all these issues, in Westminster politics it is party not

gender that demarcates the predominant pattern of ideological beliefs and values. Moreover

these findings suggest one possible reason helping to explain why women backbenchers proved

less likely to rebel during the first Labour administration than their male colleagues (Cowley and

Childs 2001), namely their attitudes towards a range of social and economic values were fairly

moderate and therefore largely in tune with the centrist position of the Blair government.

[Table 2 about here]

Yet in contrast, when we measure attitudes and values directly relating to women's

interests, we find significant differences between women and men politicians, and differences that

are consistently found within each of the major parties. The results confirm that on the scales

concerning support for equal opportunities and affirmative action there are strong and significant

gender differences among Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians, and the

affirmative action scale also divides women and men nationalist politicians. The scale measuring

attitudes towards affirmative action includes items where women candidates might be expected to


11

have a direct interest in the outcome, including support for all women shortlists, the use of

reserved seats, or the use of positive quotas to get more women candidates nominated. In some

ways the gender difference within the Labour party is not surprising, since this reflects the

prevalent ethos. But the fact that there is a significant gender gap on affirmative action within the

Conservative party is both striking and unexpected, since this runs directly counter to the official

policy and mainstream ideology of the party. In the Conservative party, for example, all politicians

proved least supportive of the use of affirmative action, but men are significantly less in favour

than women politicians within the party. There are also consistent gender differences in each

major party towards the scale measuring ‘liberal’ gender equality, reflecting issues such as more

general support for equal opportunities policy for women, the items concerning men and women’s

roles in the family and workforce, and attitudes towards the suitability of women for public office.

The comparison of means shows that male Conservatives prove least approving on this scale,

while female Conservative politicians are positive; indeed on this scale they prove slightly more

positive than male Labour politicians.

[Table 3 and 4 about here]

Yet these gender differences could be due to differences in other characteristics of men

and women politicians. Tables 3 and 4 therefore use multivariate regression analysis to see

whether these gender differences persist on these two scales even after controlling for factors

that can be expected to shape political attitudes, such as the incumbency status, education,

income, and the age of politicians. Among the different factors, age does prove important, with

the younger generation of politicians more favorable towards gender equality, as might be

expected. The contrasts between the Labour and Conservative parties remain important.

Nevertheless the results confirm that the gender gap continues to be significantly related to the

affirmative action and the liberal gender equality value scales even with these prior social

controls, suggesting that the gap reflects deep-seated attitudinal differences between women and

men leaders that cannot simply be explained away as due to their social background.

IV: Conclusions and Implications

Westminster provides a suitable case to analyse how far the entry of more women into

elected office has the capacity to make a substantive difference in the context of a European

parliamentary democracy characterized by strong party discipline. The 1997 British general

election saw the proportion of women MPs doubling overnight, from 9.2 to 18.2 percent of the

House of Commons. In the governing Labour party, women became one quarter of the MPs. The

2001 election saw the return of 118 women MPs, rather than further gains, due to the

abandonment of Labour’s All-Women shortlist policy in half their target seats (Lovenduski 2001).

Nevertheless their greater numbers make women MPs more able to form alliances and act as a

coherent force to affect the dominant culture of their institution, as well as being in a position to


12

perform the ‘critical’ acts that Dahlerup (1988) argues are necessary to the feminization of

political institutions.

Yet despite extensive popular interest, and the publication of some qualitative studies, so

far little previous research has presented systematic attitudinal evidence about the impact of

women as legislators at Westminster. As argued earlier, in most European parliamentary

democracies any evidence based on roll call voting provides an unduly limited and conservative

indication of gender differences, due to the existence of strict party discipline on most legislative

votes. Other behavioral measures, such as rhetorical analysis of debating styles or content

analysis of Early Day Motions, so far unavailable, would provide alternative indicators of the

existence of any gender differences at Westminster. Without independent verification, self-

reported claims expressed during interviews that women politicians will prioritize women’s

interests and concerns more than men cannot be accepted at face value, any more than we

would accept without demonstrable evidence any claims that Labour MPs speak for and defend

the interests of the poor, or that Conservative MPs represent the business community. But we

believe that the idea that increasing the numbers of women will bring qualitative change, or that

descriptive representation will lead to substantive representation, depends upon the existence of

underlying differences in the values and attitudes of the groups concerned. Attitudinal differences

concerning the issues that affect women’s autonomy are the necessary but not sufficient

condition for women to act ‘for women’. If women and men MPs are similar in these respects,

then even if women gradually became the majority at Westminster, British parliamentary politics

will continue in familiar ways. The public face of politics will become feminized, but the political

culture and the substantive policy agenda will remain unchanged. Qualitative change will follow

quantitative change only if female politicians differ significantly from men, for example if they give

greater priority to public spending on education rather than defense, or if they raise more

parliamentary questions about childcare than about Europe, or if they pay more attention to

constituency service rather than parliamentary debate.

From the standpoint of feminist theory, the most important changes expected from women’s entry

into public office would be those that support the goals of increased women's autonomy by

acknowledging and redressing gender inequality. Such change will follow from different values

among women and men that were tested using British Representation Study data. As expected,

in the system of strong, cohesive and disciplined party government that prevails at Westminster,

the evidence confirms that men and women's attitudes and values within each party coincide on

many issues where party competition reflects the traditional left-right ideological spectrum. Thus,

the entry of more women into Westminster cannot be expected to alter policies where the major

parties remain deeply divided, such as Britain’s role with the European Union, the traditional role

of the state in the economy, or moral traditionalism. Yet this does not mean to say that the only

impact of more women in parliament will be symbolic. The results indicate that women and men


13

politicians differ most significantly over issues that directly affect women's autonomy, that is, in

their attitudes towards positive action and liberal sex equality policy.

Therefore the idea that increasing women's representation will change politics has public

resonance. Much of the popular rhetoric supporting the selection of more women candidates

prior to 1997 stressed that, while a clear case for positive discrimination in favor of women

candidates could be made on the grounds of equity alone, in addition the entry of more women

into Westminster would help to change policy priorities. The lack of any obvious evidence of

radical change in terms of backbench voting rebellions led towards the popular view that the new

women at Westminster were conformist and would be unlikely to lead towards radical change.

Yet this popular conclusion rests on exaggerated expectations and faulty premises. The results of

this study suggest that the expansion of women’s representation at Westminster does promises

to alter the balance of interests, not on all economic and social issues, but most clearly on the

issues of women’s autonomy.

What are the implications of these findings? This study is limited to examining differences

between women and men politicians in terms of their attitudes and values, which represents only

one dimension of legislative life. In further research by the Study of Gender and Parliament group

we plan to examine whether these value differences have important consequences for legislative

behaviour, for example in terms of parliamentary questions, committee debates, Early Day

Motions, perceptions of legislative roles, and backbench activities such as constituency work.

Further research is needed on all these issues. Nevertheless, theoretically, there are at least four

distinct ways in which the value differences that we have established between women and men

politicians could potentially alter the UK House of Commons.

First these differences could generate changes in the political leadership. British MPs

constitute the pool from which all elected government leaders is drawn, including members of the

Cabinet and the opposition front benches. Changes in the composition of parliament may

ultimately be expected to percolate upwards to the highest offices of state; studies have

established that in Western Europe the proportion of women in parliament is one of the best

predictors of the proportion of women in Cabinet (Davis 1997; Siaroff 2000).

Second, legislative priorities may alter. As discussed earlier, like many other parliaments

in Western Europe, the UK House of Commons is characterised by strong party discipline,

seriously limiting the autonomy of backbench MPs on whipped votes affecting government

legislation. Nevertheless, women backbenchers can play an important role in developing and

debating public policy, in shaping and revising legislation, in scrutinising the actions of

government departments, and in linking citizens and government (Norton 1993). The most

obvious direct impact of gender differences in values may be in legislative activities where

backbenchers have the most autonomy, such as in the choice of Parliamentary Questions or


14

Private Members Bills.

Thirdly, party politics may be changed. Conservative MPs determine the choice of the

candidates who can be elected as party leader by the wider membership, while Labour MPs help

select the leader and shadow cabinet. Parliamentarians play a leading role in determining official

party policy, as embodied ultimately in the official party manifesto, as well as shaping the nature

of the party image in the public’s mind. Comparative research by Caul (2001) indicates that the

presence of women in senior party positions is a major factor in the adoption of measures to

promote sex equality in political representation. Even if women members adopt backbench roles

that are similar to men, they could still work effectively behind the scenes, influencing matters

such as the contents of party manifestos, the government’s legislative agenda, the policy

priorities in committees, or the tone and issues raised by parliamentary debate. If these claims

are valid, then the entry of more women into parliament could subtly alter the predominant culture

and policy agenda at Westminster, a process affecting both women and men members equally.

Such a shift would not be revealed by comparison of women and men MPs, but rather by

changes in the parliamentary culture over time. Yet such a development would be difficult or even

impossible to detect in the UK House of Commons through any systematic means, given that the

dramatic rise in the proportion of women members at Westminster in 1997 coincided with the

entry of the new Labour government.

The findings are particularly relevant for the reform of party selection processes, and

therefore the opportunities available for women candidates in future elections. In 2001

the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act became law, allowing British parties to

use affirmative action to increase their complement of women representatives. As

drafted, the legislation is permissive. It removes the possibility of prosecution for

affirmative action under British law. It does not indemnify parties from prosecution under

European law. But whether parties will take advantage of this legislation depends upon

their predominant culture and how far they favor such measures. The presence of

women who support such measures in the senior ranks of the party has been shown to

be an important influence on how parties react (Caul 2001). The parliamentary selection

processes used by parties could therefore be influenced by the attitudes of women

candidates and MPs who are pressuring for new opportunities for women in elected

office.

Lastly, as Mansbridge suggests (1999) the composition of parliament could have a

significant impact on the articulation and defence of group interests within representative

democracy. Women's presence as elected representatives signals the legitimacy of their

concerns and may bring a wider recognition of those interests. It therefore seems plausible that


15

the value differences documented here among women and men politicians on issues of women’s

autonomy, combined with the increased feminization of public office that has occurred in Britain

during the last decade, are likely to have broad long-term consequences for representative

democracy.

We can conclude that the entry of more women into Westminster will not generate a

radical revolution in the predominant culture at Westminster, as the more optimistic scenarios

suggest. But nor are there grounds to believe that the entry of more women into Westminster

merely led to ‘politics as usual’. The evidence consistently suggests that women politicians in all

the major British parties (not just Labour) do bring a different set of values to issues affecting

women’s equality, in the workplace, home, and public sphere. While it may take some time, if

these attitudes gradually come to shape party manifestos, political debates and ultimately

legislative action, for example by influencing policies towards equal pay, reproductive rights, and

the adoption of affirmative action strategies in the recruitment of women within parties, then the

entry of more women into Westminster has the capacity to make more than simply a symbolic

difference to the face of British representative democracy.


16

Table 1: Factor Analysis of Political Attitudes Free Market

Economy Affirmative Action Liberal Gender

Equality Europe Moral

TraditionalismBig business benefits owners at worker's expense .822Ordinary people do not get their fair share of wealth .799Management will always try to get the better of employees .798There is one law for rich, one for poor .793Government should redistribute wealth .649All women short-lists .818Reserved seats for women .805Positive quotas/affirmative action for women .791Opinion on gender quotas -.665Financial support for women candidates .649Men better suited for politics than women .733Husbands job is to earn money, wife’s is at home .711Family life suffers when wife has full-time job .679Should Parliament have more women MPs? -.607Government should ensure that women have equal chances -.522Attempts to give equal opportunities to women .491Opinion on single European Currency .757Long-term policy on the EU should be... .742Feel about Britain's membership in the EU .741Schools should teach children to obey authority .617Censorship is necessary to uphold moral standards .611The law should be obeyed even if wrong .584Young people lack respect for traditional values .584People who break law given stiffer sentences -.428 .546Being a housewife is just as fulfilling as working for pay .409 % Variance Explained 35.6 8.8 7.2 5.1 4.2 Cronbach’s Alpha for each scale .90 .86 .80 .87 .80Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. Rotation converged in 7 iterations. Coefficients less than .40 were excluded. Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test the reliability of each of the scales. Source: British Representation Study 2001 (N. 999).


17

Table 2: Mean scores on the value scales by party and gender

PARTY Gender N. Pro-Free

Market

economy

scale

Pro-Affirmative

Action

Scale

Pro-Liberal

Gender Equality

Scale

Pro-

European

Scale

Pro-Moral

Traditionalism

Scale

Con Men 194 78 9 66 29 57

Women 38 80 14 75 28 58

Eta .07 .16*** .23*** .03 .02

Lab Men 165 40 34 85 54 41

Women 58 45 50 90 53 38

Eta .17*** .40*** .17** .05 .09

L. Dem Men 189 44 25 82 61 38

Women 55 45 36 87 62 37

Eta .04 .28*** .17*** .02 .05

Nat Men 75 38 28 81 58 36

Women 14 38 35 89 61 36

Eta .01 .16 .26** .08 .02

Note: The figures represent the mean score on each of the value scales among 999 British

politicians (parliamentary candidates and elected members) by party and gender, without any

controls. See Table 1 for the items includes in each of these scales. Each of the scales has been

summed and standardized to 100 points for ease of interpretation, where low equals minimal

support and high equals maximum support. The difference between groups is measured by

ANOVA and the strength of association coefficient is Eta. Significance P. ***=.01 **=.05 *.10. Due to the smaller number of cases, ‘Nat’ combines members of the SNP and Plaid Cymru

parties.

Source: British Representation Study 2001


18

Table 3: Regression model predicting support for affirmative action values scale

UnstandardizedCoefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 32.32 4.27 7.57 .00

Woman politician (1/0) 10.75 1.18 .23 9.11 .00Age (Year of birth) -.07 .05 -.04 -1.51 .13

MP elected in 2001 1.18 .68 .05 1.73 .08

Conservative -18.57 1.95 -.45 -9.54 .00Labour 7.43 1.97 .17 3.78 .00Liberal Democrat -2.31 1.90 -.06 -1.22 .22

Total household income -.04 .22 -.01 -.19 .85

Education -.29 .75 -.01 -.38 .70

Adjusted R2 .40

Note: The OLS regression model has the standardized 100-point Affirmative Action value scale

as the dependent variable. See Table 1 for the items included in this scale. The figures in bold

are significant at the conventional level. Total household income, as a proxy for class, is

measured using a 10-category scale. Education is measured on a 4-point scale from primary

school to university or polytechnic degree. N. 970 respondents.



19

Table 4: Regression model predicting support for the Liberal Gender Equality values scale

Unstandardized

CoefficientsStandardized

Coefficientst Sig.

B Std. Error Beta(Constant) 65.07 3.43 18.98 .00 Woman politician (1/0) 6.55 .94 .18 6.94 .00Age (Year of birth) .26 .04 .18 6.62 .00MP elected in 2001 .08 .55 .00 .15 .88

Conservative -14.80 1.56 -.47 -9.46 .00Labour 3.89 1.58 .12 2.46 .01Liberal Democrat 1.22 1.53 .04 .80 .43

Total household income .42 .18 .07 2.34 .02Education -.33 .61 -.01 -.55 .58

Adjusted R2 .33

Note: The OLS regression model has the standardized 100-point Liberal Gender Equality values

scale as the dependent variable. See Table 1 for the items included in this scale. The figures in

bold are significant at the conventional level. Total household income, as a proxy for class, is

measured using a 10-category scale. Education is measured on a 4-point scale from primary

school to university or polytechnic degree. N. 980 respondents.


21

Figure 1: Women in Public Office, UK

Women MPs in UK Parliament

1 28 4

14 159

24 21 1724 25 29 26 26 23 27

19 23

41

60

120118

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

19181922192319241929193119351945195019511955195919641966197019741974197919831987199219972001

N. o

f Wom

en

% Women in Public Office UK 1st Jan 2000

1618

2427

3337 39 40

0

10

20

30

40

50

House of Lords

House of Commons

European Parliament

Local Councillors

Government Posts

Scottish Parliament

Public Appointments

Welsh Assembly

% W

omen

22

References The British Representation Study 2001 was funded by the Center for Public Leadership at the

John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, directed by the authors, and

administered by Birkbeck College, University of London. We are most grateful to David Baker

who helped administer the survey, to party officials who cooperated generously with the study,

and to all candidates and MPs who completed the survey. This study forms part of a larger

project conducted by the Study of Gender and Parliament Group including Joni Lovenduski,

Pippa Norris, Sarah Childs and Philip Cowley.

Bergqvist, C. (2000) Equal Democracies. Dartmouth: Aldershot.

Bowler, S, D.M. Farrell, and R.M. Katz. (1999) Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government.

Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Bratton, K.A. and L.P. Ray. (2002) ‘Descriptive representation, policy outcomes, and municipal

day-care coverage in Norway.’ American Journal of Political Science. 46(2): 428-437.

Broughton, S and S. Palmieri. (1999) ‘Gendered contributions to parliamentary debates: The case

of euthanasia.’ Australian Journal of Political Science. 34(1): 29-45.

Caul, M. (2001) ‘Political Parties and the Adoption of Candidate Gender Quotas: A Cross-

National Analysis' Journal of Politics 63 (4).

Carroll, S. J. (2001) Ed. The Impact of Women in Public Office. Indiana: University of Indiana

Press.

Childs, S. (2001a) ‘‘Attitudinally feminist’? The New Labour Women MPs and the Substantive

Representation of Women.’ Politics 21(3): 178-185.

Childs, S. (2001b) ‘In her own words: New Labour women and the substantive representation of

women.’ British Journal of Politics and International Relations. June.

Cowley, P. and S. Childs. (2001) ‘Critical but not rebellious? New Labour women in the House of

Commons.’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science

Association, San Franscisco.

____________ (Forthcoming) 'Too Spineless to Rebel?' British Journal of Political Science.

Cowley, P. and M. Stuart. (1997). ‘Sodomy, slaughter, Sunday shopping and seatbelts: Free

votes in the House of Commons, 1979 to 1996.’ Party Politics 3(1): 119-130.

Dahlerup, D. (1988) ‘From a small to a large minority: Women in Scandinavian politics.’

Scandinavian Political Studies. 11(4): 275-298.

23

Dahlerup, D. (1999) ‘Using quotas to increase women’s political representation.’ In IDEA: Women

in Politics Beyond Numbers. IDEA: Stockholm. http://www.int-idea.se/women/

Darcy, R, S. Welsh and J. Clark. (1994) Women, Elections and Representation. 2nd Ed. Lincoln:

University of Nebraska.

Davis, R. H. (1997) Women in power in parliamentary democracies. Lincoln: University of

Nebraska Press.

Diamond, I. (1977) Sex Roles in the State House. New Haven: Conn: Yale University Press.

Dolan, J. (1997) ’Support for women’s interests in the 103rd Congress: The distinct impact of

congressional women.’ Women & Politics. 18(4): 81-94.

Duerst-Lahti, G. and R. M. Kelly (eds.) (1995) Gender, Power, Leadership and Governance,

University of Michigan Press.

Eagle, A. and J. Lovenduski. (1998) High Time or High Tide for Labour Women. London: Fabian

Society.

Evans, G. and P. Norris. (1999) Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-term

Perspective London: Sage Publications.

Kanter, R. M. (1977) ‘Some effects of proportion of group life: skewed sex ratios and responses

to token women.’ American Journal of Sociology. 82(2): 965-990.

Karvonnen, L., G. Djupsund and T. Carlson (1995) 'Political language' in L. Karvonnen and P.

Selle (eds.) Women in Nordic Politics. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

Karvonnen, L. and P. Selle. (1995) Women in Nordic Politics. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

Kathlene, L. 1994. ‘Power and influence in state legislative policy-making: The interaction of

gender and position in committee hearing debates.’ American Political Science Review.

88(3): 560-576.

Keswick, T., R. Pockley and A. Guillaume. (1999) Conservative Women. London: Centre for

Policy Studies. http://www.cps.org.uk/women.htm.

Lipset, S. M. and S. Rokkan. (1967) Party Systems and Voter Alignments. New York: Free

Press.

Lovenduski, J. and P. Norris. Eds. (1996) Women in Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lovenduski, J. and P. Norris. (1993) Gender and Party Politics. London: Sage.

Lovenduski, J. (1997) ‘Gender politics: A breakthrough for women?’ Parliamentary Affairs 50(4):

708-719.

24

Lovenduski, J. (2001) ‘Women and Politics: Minority representation or critical mass?’ In Britain

Votes 2001, Ed. Pippa Norris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

MacDougal, L. (1998) Westminster Women. London: Vintage.

Mansbridge, J. (1999) ‘Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A

contingent ‘yes’’ Journal of Politics 61(3): 628-657.

Norris, P. and J. Lovenduski. 1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British

Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Norris, P. (1996) ‘Women Politicians: Transforming Westminster?’ Parliamentary Affairs 49(1):

89-102.

Norris, P. (1999) ‘Gender: A Gender-Generation Gap?’ In Critical Elections: British Parties and

Voters in Long-term Perspective. Edited by Geoffrey Evans and Pippa Norris. London:

Sage.

Norris, P. and J. Lovenduski. (2001) The British Representation Study 2001.

http://www.pippanorris.com

Norris, P. and J. Lovenduski, (2001) The Iceberg and the Titanic: Electoral Defeat, Policy Moods

and Party Change. Paper given at the 2001 annual meeting of the Elections, Parties and

Public Opinion Group (EPOP), University of Sussex.

Norris, P. and R. Inglehart. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the

World. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Norton, P. (1993) Does Parliament Matter? London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Pelling, H. (1968) A Short History of the Labour Party. London: Macmillan.

Perkins, A. (1999) ‘Women: So far, so what?’ The Guardian 29 April.

Perrigo, S. (1996) ‘Women and Change in the Labour Party 1979-1995.’ In Women in Politics,

Eds Joni Lovenduski and Pippa Norris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Phillips, A. (ed) (1998) Feminism and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pitkin, H. (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Reingold, B. (2000) Representing Women: Sex, Gender, and Legislative Behavior in

Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Rosenthal, C.S. (1997) ‘A view of their own: Women’s committee leadership styles and state

legislatures.’ Policy Science Journal. 25(4): 585-600.

25

Ross, K. (2002) ‘Women's place in 'male' space: Gender and effect in parliamentary contexts.’

Parliamentary Affairs 55(1): 189-194.

Short, C. (1996) ‘Women and the Labour Party.’ In Women in Politics, Eds Joni Lovenduski and

Pippa Norris. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Siaroff A. (2000) ‘Women's representation in legislatures and cabinets in industrial democracies.’

International Political Science Review. 21 (2): 197-215.

Skjeie, H. (1993) ' Ending the Male Political Hegemony?' in J. Lovenduski and P. Norris (eds)

Gender and Party Politics. London: Sage.

Swers, M.L. (2001) ‘Understanding the policy impact of electing women: Evidence from research

on congress and state legislatures,’ PS: Political Science and Society. 34(2): 217-220.

Swers, M.L. (1998) ‘Are women more likely to vote for women’s issue bills than their male

colleagues?’ Legislative Studies Quarterly. 23(3): 435-448.

Tamerius, K. (1995) 'Sex, Gender and Leadership in the Representation of Women' in Duerst-

Lahti and Kelly (eds.) (1995) Gender, Power, Leadership and Governance, University of

Michigan Press.

Thomas, S. (1994) How Women Legislate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thomas, S. and C. Wilcox. (eds) (1998) Women and Elective Office. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Thomson, M. (1999) ‘Blair’s babes: Gender governance and Power.’ In Feminist Perspectives on

Public Law. Eds. S. Millns and N. Whitty. London: Cavendish Publishing.

Tremblay, M. (1998) ‘Do female MPs substantively represent women?’ Canadian Journal of

Political Science. 31(3): 435-465.

Tremblay, M. and R. Pelletier. (2000) ‘More feminists or more women? Descriptive and

substantive representations of women in the 1997 Canadian federal elections.’

International Political Science Review. 21(4): 381-405.

Vega, A. and J.M.Firestone. (1995) ‘The effects of gender on Congressional behavior and the

substantive representation of women.’ Legislative Studies Quarterly. 20(2): 213-222.

Wängnerud, L. (2000) 'Testing the Politics of Presence: Women's Representation in the Swedish

Riksdag' Scandinavian Political Studies, 23 (1): XX-XX.

Yoder, J. (1991) 'Rethinking Tokenism: Looking Beyond Numbers' Gender and Society,

5.2: 178-192.

westminster women: the politics of presence women.pdf · westminster women: the politics of...

Documents